 Dear colleagues, I think the topic discussed in this section is surely very attractive, but to find answers to the asked question is very difficult at the current state of research and available methodologies. This is particularly in the case when we focus on the originators or causes of the turning points in the development also and the cultural changes or transformations. These changes can be mainly traced in the sphere of movable artefacts since we cannot obtain much more information about historical processes in the European prehistory otherwise. Of course, there are exceptions. For example, we can mention at least two reasonably plausible interpretations of specific historical events in the region. The first is the cultural transformation that occurred during the Nino-1 period on Crete that was most likely caused by the volcanic eruption of Crete. The second one is the collapse of the late Bronze Age Asian civilization through the invasion of sea peoples mentioned predominantly in the Egyptian sources. In the northern parts of prehistoric Europe there are no similar indices of specific historical transformations and thus we have to rely only on the analysis of transformations that can be traced in various manifestations of material culture or more rarely also on the analysis of particular archaeological contexts. The contribution focuses on the analysis of possible cultural transformation in the Bronze Age in the area of the present-day Bohemia and their possible link with the processing occurring in the surrounding regions. In the Bohemia, the Bronze Age took approximately 1300 years with the following cultural sequence. The Unikite culture in this earlier phase, the tumulus culture in the middle Bronze Age and the so-called cornfield culture representing the late and final Bronze Age. During this period we can identify several turning points that can be traced in the preserved archaeological material. Specifically, we can identify cultural transformations at the time of the early and middle Bronze Age like in Germany and changes at the beginning and during the development of cornfield period. The genesis of the early Bronze Age Unikite culture can be clearly interpreted as a matter of the previous analytic culture environment from which it gradually developed to the advanced culture of the Bronze Age. On the other hand, the early Bronze Age conclusion saw such significant changes in the material culture that seemed to indicate a sharp break in the current cultural development. This impulse causing this new cultural environment obviously came from Carpentine Basin but it hit a vast area of Europe. The region of Bohemia was fully integrated in this new cultural environment and the cultural sea change can be determined not only on a distinct change in the artificial material but also on other findings such as the disappearance of the network of the early Bronze Age hilltop sites, the appearance of an internally different settlement structure within the residential areas, the existence of settlements in the previously uninhabited regions and the transformation in the raw material resources used to produce bronze artifacts as demonstrated by chemical analysis. We cannot ascertain any such major changes in following development of the Bronze Age cultures in Bohemia that can be traced in the archaeological sources but the development was still far from continuous. Already in the Middle and Late Bronze Age, at the time of Middle and Late Bronze Age, the previous monocultural character of settlement disappeared and a significant boundary of two different cultural complexes constituted on the territory of Bohemia. The more substantial part of Bohemia belonged to the newly constituted Bohemian East Bavarian group of the North Alpine Unfilled Complex with the Knovis culture as its eastern most representative. On the other hand, the Lausitian culture with its settlement in the northern and eastern Bohemia belonged to the cultural milieu of the northern-nurse-unfilled complex. At the beginning of the Late Bronze Age, the Lausitian culture expanded to the eastern part of the central Bohemia where we can find traces of violent acculturation at the unique site of Valin. Based on the analysis of finds and data obtained by natural sciences, it can be stated that the settlement was filed during the tumulus culture and was destroyed at the turn of Bronze C2D phases. It is in the 14th century BC. There have been identified many traces of other human activities indicating the importance of this area, especially the depositing of gold hordes and ceramic depots. The site of Valimskalka with its scope of finds and perhaps also with its considerable social significance could be the center of the respective ritual activities. Even the form of the fortification corresponded more to the symbolic determination of space rather than the actual defensive function. At the very beginning of the expansion of the Lausitian culture into this area, this center had repeatedly became the target of attacks which resulted in this destruction accompanied with the massacre of a substantial part of the population. Large pits and sections of the ditches at the site contained skeletons in several layers, some in anatomic position, other markedly damaged and fragmented and almost never in a position corresponding to the contemporary burial rite and without any pieces of personal jewellery. Anthropological analysis of part of the bodies revealed numerous perimortum injuries, violently separated skulls and post-mortem manipulation with already partially disintegrated bodies. So far the violent destruction has been documented for this period only on exposit and fortified sites, for example also in Blucina in Moravia. In the common agricultural environment the acculturation could have taken quite different perhaps a minor form as evidenced by the finds from, for example, the site of Chaslovskala in the Kutna Hora region where we found the settlement futures of the Lausitian culture existing beside a settlement dated to the final tumulus culture without any indication of destruction horizon. The boundary between the North Alpine and the Lausitian unfilled cultures remained in Bohemia for over 600 years and both groups had probably a different cultural basis. While this boundary stayed practically unchanged in Norwest Bohemia, in Central Bohemia on the other hand the late Bronze Age borders between the Knovies and Lausitian cultures were significantly changing. At least from the time of the chronological phases Bronze T, Hallstatt A1 there were two separate cultural entities established in the Central Bohemian-Elbert River region. The boundary line formed a belt of uninhabited territory. Moreover in the Hallstatt A2 period on the contrary bearers of the Knovies culture expanded to the east and occupied the majority of the Fertile Central Bohemian-Elbert region. Subsequently the two cultural complexes were now divided by a new district boundary line running along the Elbert River. The Lausitian culture retreated to the right bank where significant 40 feet settlements were filed. This moment together with the fact that a part of the left bank helped territory formerly inhabited by the Lausitian culture had remained inhabited for some time and the Knovies culture penetrated there only in the final Bronze Age seems to suggest the violent character of this cultural transformation. In the area of southwest Unfield culture unit in Bohemia the transformation between the late and final Bronze Age was rather gradual and continuous. There are definite far cultural entities the Skihtari culture in the Central Northwest in the South Bohemia, the Lausitian culture in North Bohemia and the Ninja culture in the West Bohemian region. The only district change in the cultural development of the final Bronze Age is represented by a newly established cultural entity in East Bohemia, so called Silesian Latinica culture. It's currently assumed that this culture is related to the arrival of a new population from the eastern regions belonging to the sphere on the Lausitian Unfield cultures. Because with the development of the entire cultural complex we can observe certain discontinuities in cultural manifestation in East Bohemia especially at the burial grounds where the places of early Lausitian graves were not respected. As far as the conclusion of the Bronze Age in Bohemia is concerned the current sources seems to confirm that the transition to the Iron Age did not represent as sudden and significant historical turning points. On the Bohemia territory there have not been detected any dramatic changes in archaeological context and finds dated to the time of the Hallstatt B and Hallstatt C phases and the cultural development seems to proceed continuously. So to conclusion, archaeological sources from the Bohemian basin dated to the Bronze Age indicate that there were several moments that can indicate possible cultural discontinuities or changes in the development of the society of this period. The only time interval that deserves the designation of a turning point for the Bohemian territory is the transition between the Early and Middle Bronze Age. The term cultural changes is then appropriate for the processes that took place at the beginning of the Late Bronze Age in connection with the expansion of Lausitian culture burials into the East Bohemian region. Generally, however, the archaeological sources clearly reflect the continuity of cultural development which began in the Middle Bronze Age and continued deep into the Iron Age. This uninterrupted cultural development has been used as the main argument for the hypothesis regarding the possible ethnicity of the burials of the Tutumulus culture that it is that they belong to the population which would be called in the later period Celtic. Thank you for your attention.